German community needs a second mailing list for effective working
Hello, The members of the German community would like to approach you with our wish to install a second mailing list (dev...@openoffice.apache.org) moderated by Jörg, Raphael und Michael (Stehmann). The purpose of this separate list would be to distinguish general user questions from specific discussions among the project members and so avoid the ensuing confusion. Our needs for internal communication are growing by the day. E.g. when it comes to coordinating our participation in fairs. We strongly believe that this kind of public activity is very useful in order to popularize AOO and win over new collaborators as well as new user groups. Recent examples are: http://openrheinruhr.de/aussteller.html (Mechtilde und Michael (Stehmann)) http://www.linuxday.at/ (Raphael und Detlef) A further reason for our request is the increase in mail traffic, from around 50 posts monthly only a year ago to almost 250 posts at present. Yours, Bernd Detlef Jan Jörg Josef Markus Matthias Michael (Höhne) Michael (Stehmann) Romana Raphael Richard (members and supporters of the german AOO community) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: German community needs a second mailing list for effective working
+1 It's not only Open Rhein Ruhr, but also FOSDEM (Brussels), Chemnitzer Linuxtage (Chemnitz, Saxonia), FrOSCon (St.Augustin - near Bonn) and T-Dose (Eindhoven) we participate. Regards Michael (Stehmann) On 11.12.2013 09:22, Jörg Schmidt wrote: Hello, The members of the German community would like to approach you with our wish to install a second mailing list (dev...@openoffice.apache.org) moderated by Jörg, Raphael und Michael (Stehmann). The purpose of this separate list would be to distinguish general user questions from specific discussions among the project members and so avoid the ensuing confusion. Our needs for internal communication are growing by the day. E.g. when it comes to coordinating our participation in fairs. We strongly believe that this kind of public activity is very useful in order to popularize AOO and win over new collaborators as well as new user groups. Recent examples are: http://openrheinruhr.de/aussteller.html (Mechtilde und Michael (Stehmann)) http://www.linuxday.at/ (Raphael und Detlef) A further reason for our request is the increase in mail traffic, from around 50 posts monthly only a year ago to almost 250 posts at present. Yours, Bernd Detlef Jan Jörg Josef Markus Matthias Michael (Höhne) Michael (Stehmann) Romana Raphael Richard (members and supporters of the german AOO community) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: German community needs a second mailing list for effective working
+1 From the Netherlands. Regards, Arthur RA Stehmann schreef op 11-12-2013 9:44: +1 It's not only Open Rhein Ruhr, but also FOSDEM (Brussels), Chemnitzer Linuxtage (Chemnitz, Saxonia), FrOSCon (St.Augustin - near Bonn) and T-Dose (Eindhoven) we participate. Regards Michael (Stehmann) On 11.12.2013 09:22, Jörg Schmidt wrote: Hello, The members of the German community would like to approach you with our wish to install a second mailing list (dev...@openoffice.apache.org) moderated by Jörg, Raphael und Michael (Stehmann). The purpose of this separate list would be to distinguish general user questions from specific discussions among the project members and so avoid the ensuing confusion. Our needs for internal communication are growing by the day. E.g. when it comes to coordinating our participation in fairs. We strongly believe that this kind of public activity is very useful in order to popularize AOO and win over new collaborators as well as new user groups. Recent examples are: http://openrheinruhr.de/aussteller.html (Mechtilde und Michael (Stehmann)) http://www.linuxday.at/ (Raphael und Detlef) A further reason for our request is the increase in mail traffic, from around 50 posts monthly only a year ago to almost 250 posts at present. Yours, Bernd Detlef Jan Jörg Josef Markus Matthias Michael (Höhne) Michael (Stehmann) Romana Raphael Richard (members and supporters of the german AOO community) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: German community needs a second mailing list for effective working
+1 from me, my only concern is how to make sure important information is not kept solely on dev-de (important may also be hints about how to compile etc). I see a heavy burden on the moderators to ensure that this happens. rgds jan I. On 11 December 2013 10:32, Arthur Buijs art...@artietee.nl wrote: +1 From the Netherlands. Regards, Arthur RA Stehmann schreef op 11-12-2013 9:44: +1 It's not only Open Rhein Ruhr, but also FOSDEM (Brussels), Chemnitzer Linuxtage (Chemnitz, Saxonia), FrOSCon (St.Augustin - near Bonn) and T-Dose (Eindhoven) we participate. Regards Michael (Stehmann) On 11.12.2013 09:22, Jörg Schmidt wrote: Hello, The members of the German community would like to approach you with our wish to install a second mailing list (dev...@openoffice.apache.org) moderated by Jörg, Raphael und Michael (Stehmann). The purpose of this separate list would be to distinguish general user questions from specific discussions among the project members and so avoid the ensuing confusion. Our needs for internal communication are growing by the day. E.g. when it comes to coordinating our participation in fairs. We strongly believe that this kind of public activity is very useful in order to popularize AOO and win over new collaborators as well as new user groups. Recent examples are: http://openrheinruhr.de/aussteller.html (Mechtilde und Michael (Stehmann)) http://www.linuxday.at/ (Raphael und Detlef) A further reason for our request is the increase in mail traffic, from around 50 posts monthly only a year ago to almost 250 posts at present. Yours, Bernd Detlef Jan Jörg Josef Markus Matthias Michael (Höhne) Michael (Stehmann) Romana Raphael Richard (members and supporters of the german AOO community) - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: German community needs a second mailing list for effective working
+1 from me, my only concern is how to make sure important information is not kept solely on dev-de (important may also be hints about how to compile etc). I see a heavy burden on the moderators to ensure that this happens. I do not understand the problem. By de-community is nothing compiles. Even today there are, on the German list, no information on this because there this information is not required. Greetings, Jörg - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: German community needs a second mailing list for effective working
jan i wrote: +1 from me, my only concern is how to make sure important information is not kept solely on dev-de (important may also be hints about how to compile etc). I see a heavy burden on the moderators to ensure that this happens. It depends on the focus, but from Joerg's initial description, the new list would help distinguish general user questions from specific discussions among the project members, so the structure seems very similar to the two mailing lists in Italian (one for users/support, one for volunteers/coordination/discussions). Moderation is easy in this case. I assume that developer-oriented questions, like building OpenOffice, despite the name dev-de, are likely to be forwarded to this list. In general, I confirm Joerg's impression that native-lang lists do not discuss these topics in general. For sure I don't see this happening on the mailing lists in Italian: people use this list or the API list. Regards, Andrea. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper
Fantastic! We were actually looking at that [2] yesterday, but were concerned because it was dated 7 months ago. We will implement it and provide feedback. Thanks again! Raymond -Original Message- From: Herbert Duerr [mailto:h...@apache.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 11:25 PM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Meffe, David K; Steele, Raymond Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper Hi David, Hi Raymond, On 11.12.2013 00:16, you wrote: Thanks for much of the help you have provided in this venture to help us get OpenOffice working in Solaris 11. Because of this we have gotten further into the compile of the OpenOffice software. We have moved past the external sources compile errors by using a newer version of Boost (1.49) and adding in the updates to the emplace_args.hpp file that have been posted on the web. Speaking of newer boost versions please also see [1] (an enhancement issue I created to update to boost 1.55). I developed a patch to do that and added it there to do this. You might want to try it out. [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123817 However, we are now encountering a problem within the binaryurp in the bridge.cxx compile. The first error message is as follows: ../main/binaryurp/source/cache.hxx, line 113: Error: iterator is not a member of std::mapcom:sun::star::uno::TypeDescription,binaryurp::Cachecom::sun::star::uno::TypeDescription::Entry. Looking at the code, it doesn't seem like an obvious error. The line it complains about is inside a struct Entry and the error occurs when defining a member variable named prev as a Map::iterator. We could use some insight into this problem and would appreciate any help. Thanks. According to the C++ standard the compiler/STL is right to complain about that code: the Entry type is incomplete until the declaration is over and a Map iterator with Entry as its mapped_type can not be expected to work while Entry is being declared. Some compiler/STL combinations allow it, but some don't. Especially the better ones (which don't treat all mapped_types the same but have optimized template specializations) run into problems here. The good news is that I already developed a replacement for this problematic code to make it more compatible with standard complying compilers/STLs. Please try out the patch in [2]. I was about to merge this into trunk soon anyway, but if you could confirm that it solves the problem on your platform this would accelerate the integration. [2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1480367 Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper
Herbert, The changes [2] worked perfectly for us. Now we are having issues compiling ::std::select1st in namedvaluecollection.cxx on line 175. Apparently, select1st is not a member of std. It appears that you may have created a ticket for this one. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123754 Raymond -Original Message- From: Herbert Duerr [mailto:h...@apache.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 11:25 PM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Meffe, David K; Steele, Raymond Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper Hi David, Hi Raymond, On 11.12.2013 00:16, you wrote: Thanks for much of the help you have provided in this venture to help us get OpenOffice working in Solaris 11. Because of this we have gotten further into the compile of the OpenOffice software. We have moved past the external sources compile errors by using a newer version of Boost (1.49) and adding in the updates to the emplace_args.hpp file that have been posted on the web. Speaking of newer boost versions please also see [1] (an enhancement issue I created to update to boost 1.55). I developed a patch to do that and added it there to do this. You might want to try it out. [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123817 However, we are now encountering a problem within the binaryurp in the bridge.cxx compile. The first error message is as follows: ../main/binaryurp/source/cache.hxx, line 113: Error: iterator is not a member of std::mapcom:sun::star::uno::TypeDescription,binaryurp::Cachecom::sun::star::uno::TypeDescription::Entry. Looking at the code, it doesn't seem like an obvious error. The line it complains about is inside a struct Entry and the error occurs when defining a member variable named prev as a Map::iterator. We could use some insight into this problem and would appreciate any help. Thanks. According to the C++ standard the compiler/STL is right to complain about that code: the Entry type is incomplete until the declaration is over and a Map iterator with Entry as its mapped_type can not be expected to work while Entry is being declared. Some compiler/STL combinations allow it, but some don't. Especially the better ones (which don't treat all mapped_types the same but have optimized template specializations) run into problems here. The good news is that I already developed a replacement for this problematic code to make it more compatible with standard complying compilers/STLs. Please try out the patch in [2]. I was about to merge this into trunk soon anyway, but if you could confirm that it solves the problem on your platform this would accelerate the integration. [2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1480367 Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper
For select1st, we noticed that the functional header delivered with stdcxx4 did not define select1st, but the aoo delivered functional located in systemstl/tr1 did. Our Makefile flags are set to include the stdcxx4 functional instead of the systemstl/tr1 functional. To get around this we modified namedvaluecollection.cxx: #if defined(__SUNPRO_CC) #include ../systemstl/tr1/functional #esle #include functional #endif Let us know if you think there is a better way to address this. Now we are on to figuring out why comphelper's having a linking error. It is trying to build libcomphelperC52.so, but it cannot find -lstlport_sunpro. Raymond -Original Message- From: Steele, Raymond Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 8:49 AM To: 'Herbert Duerr'; dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Meffe, David K Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper Herbert, The changes [2] worked perfectly for us. Now we are having issues compiling ::std::select1st in namedvaluecollection.cxx on line 175. Apparently, select1st is not a member of std. It appears that you may have created a ticket for this one. https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123754 Raymond -Original Message- From: Herbert Duerr [mailto:h...@apache.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2013 11:25 PM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Meffe, David K; Steele, Raymond Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper Hi David, Hi Raymond, On 11.12.2013 00:16, you wrote: Thanks for much of the help you have provided in this venture to help us get OpenOffice working in Solaris 11. Because of this we have gotten further into the compile of the OpenOffice software. We have moved past the external sources compile errors by using a newer version of Boost (1.49) and adding in the updates to the emplace_args.hpp file that have been posted on the web. Speaking of newer boost versions please also see [1] (an enhancement issue I created to update to boost 1.55). I developed a patch to do that and added it there to do this. You might want to try it out. [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123817 However, we are now encountering a problem within the binaryurp in the bridge.cxx compile. The first error message is as follows: ../main/binaryurp/source/cache.hxx, line 113: Error: iterator is not a member of std::mapcom:sun::star::uno::TypeDescription,binaryurp::Cachecom::sun::star::uno::TypeDescription::Entry. Looking at the code, it doesn't seem like an obvious error. The line it complains about is inside a struct Entry and the error occurs when defining a member variable named prev as a Map::iterator. We could use some insight into this problem and would appreciate any help. Thanks. According to the C++ standard the compiler/STL is right to complain about that code: the Entry type is incomplete until the declaration is over and a Map iterator with Entry as its mapped_type can not be expected to work while Entry is being declared. Some compiler/STL combinations allow it, but some don't. Especially the better ones (which don't treat all mapped_types the same but have optimized template specializations) run into problems here. The good news is that I already developed a replacement for this problematic code to make it more compatible with standard complying compilers/STLs. Please try out the patch in [2]. I was about to merge this into trunk soon anyway, but if you could confirm that it solves the problem on your platform this would accelerate the integration. [2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revisionrevision=1480367 Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Checked out revision 1547453 Build problem on Windows 7
Hello Herbert,
Have install Visual C++ 2008 Feature Pack Release.
Go ahead but have another problem...
Now with Handler.cxx:
=
Building module writerfilter
=
Entering /cygdrive/c/source/aoo-trunk/main/writerfilter/source/resourcemodel
Entering
/cygdrive/c/source/aoo-trunk/main/writerfilter/unocomponent/debugservices/doctok
Entering /cygdrive/c/source/aoo-trunk/main/writerfilter/source/ooxml
Compiling: writerfilter/source/ooxml/Handler.cxx
C:/source/aoo-trunk/main/writerfilter/source/ooxml/Handler.cxx(49) : error
C2664: 'writerfilter::ooxml ::OOXMLFastContextHandler::resolveFootnote' :
cannot convert parameter 1 from 'rtl::OUString' to 'cons t sal_Int32'
No user-defined-conversion operator available that can perform this
conversion, or the operato r cannot be called
C:/source/aoo-trunk/main/writerfilter/source/ooxml/Handler.cxx(77) : error
C2664: 'writerfilter::ooxml ::OOXMLFastContextHandler::resolveEndnote' :
cannot convert parameter 1 from 'rtl::OUString' to 'const sal_Int32'
No user-defined-conversion operator available that can perform this
conversion, or the operato r cannot be called
C:/source/aoo-trunk/main/writerfilter/source/ooxml/Handler.cxx(105) : error
C2664: 'writerfilter::ooxm l::OOXMLFastContextHandler::resolveComment' :
cannot convert parameter 1 from 'rtl::OUString' to 'cons t sal_Int32'
No user-defined-conversion operator available that can perform this
conversion, or the operato r cannot be called
dmake: Error code 2, while making '../../wntmsci12.pro/slo/Handler.obj'
1 module(s):
writerfilter
need(s) to be rebuilt
Last Changed Rev: 1549788
Thank you,
Vadim.
2013/12/10 Herbert Duerr h...@apache.org
On 09.12.2013 17:46, Vadim Yedzinovich wrote:
Hello Herbert,
Commented:
//namespace _STL
//{
///** @internal */
//templateclass T, class U
//inline ::rtl::AllocatorU __stl_alloc_rebind (::rtl::AllocatorT
a, U const *)
//{
//return (::rtl::AllocatorU)(a);
//}
//}
in C:\source\aoo-trunk\main\sal\inc\rtl\allocator.hxx
So disabling that code fixed the namespace problem. Great!
*The next problem is with undeclared identifiers:*
[...]
C:/PROGRA~2/MICROS~1.0/VC/include\../../VC/include/unordered_set(64) :
error C2065: '_Hash_compare' : undeclared identifier
This looks like a known installation problem [1] for an sdk interacting
badly with a feature pack. Ariel provided some great pointers in that
mailing list thread that should solve the problem.
[1] http://markmail.org/thread/ax5fq3iebmgc437k
Herbert
aoo
we need more exposure to let the android market know AOO exists!!! what about a flash mob with AOO adopters? microsoft claims a google chrome laptop will not supply a users needs when AOO and android will do anything a windows 8 laptop will do!
Re: link update on newbie orientation page
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:43 PM, GZobel gz7c...@gmail.com wrote: On this page: http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/intro-contributing.html The link for item 2, point 4: 14 Ways to Contribute to Open Source without Being a Programming Genius or a Rock Star http://blog.smartbear.com/software-quality/bid/167051/ links to smartbear’s home blog/front page and not the actual article. here’s the link to the actual article: http://blog.smartbear.com/programming/14-ways-to-contribute-to-open-source-without-being-a-programming-genius-or-a-rock-star/ hope that helps, gz -- Gregory Zobel, Ph.D. Thanks...we'll get this fixed. -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason
Proposed: Website Satisfaction Survey
Google has a new service that makes it easy to add a website satisfaction survey to a website. The free version has 4 questions that are asked of 500 random website visitors each month. We would be given results on a monthly basis. (They also have a paid version of this service where you can customize the questions, but I think the free version is fine for our use). The questions are: I. Overall, how satisfied are you with this website? 1) Very satisfied 2) Somewhat satisfied 3) Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4) Somewhat dissatisfied 5) Very dissatisfied II. What, if anything, do you find frustrating or unappealing about this website? III. What is your main reason for visiting this website today? IV. Did you successfully complete your main reason for visiting this website today? 1) Yes, I was successful 2) I'm still completing my reason for visiting 3) No, I tried but wasn't successful You can see an example of what the survey looks like here: http://www.google.com/insights/consumersurveys/websat_example Adding it to the website is easy: a single line added to the header. Regards, -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: link update on newbie orientation page
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:43 PM, GZobel gz7c...@gmail.com wrote: On this page: http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/intro-contributing.html The link for item 2, point 4: 14 Ways to Contribute to Open Source without Being a Programming Genius or a Rock Star http://blog.smartbear.com/software-quality/bid/167051/ links to smartbear’s home blog/front page and not the actual article. here’s the link to the actual article: http://blog.smartbear.com/programming/14-ways-to-contribute-to-open-source-without-being-a-programming-genius-or-a-rock-star/ hope that helps, gz -- Gregory Zobel, Ph.D. Thanks...we'll get this fixed. Fixed. Thanks for letting us know! -Rob -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: link update on newbie orientation page
Happy to help. Appreciate the quick reply. FYI, multiple attempts to use Chrome on ChromeBook and Mac to sign up for one of the wikis failed: https://wiki.openoffice.org Each time the screen says this at the top: *To help protect against automated account creation, please select just the cat photos in the box below:* But there is never a cat picture present. Screenshot is attached. This occurred last night and today. I have not tried Firefox or Safari yet. Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Kay Schenk kay.sch...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 9:43 PM, GZobel gz7c...@gmail.com wrote: On this page: http://openoffice.apache.org/orientation/intro-contributing.html The link for item 2, point 4: 14 Ways to Contribute to Open Source without Being a Programming Genius or a Rock Star http://blog.smartbear.com/software-quality/bid/167051/ links to smartbear’s home blog/front page and not the actual article. here’s the link to the actual article: http://blog.smartbear.com/programming/14-ways-to-contribute-to-open-source-without-being-a-programming-genius-or-a-rock-star/ hope that helps, gz -- Gregory Zobel, Ph.D. Thanks...we'll get this fixed. Fixed. Thanks for letting us know! -Rob -- - MzK Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time, for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect. -- James Mason -- Gregory Zobel, Ph.D. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Introduction
Hi Folks, I've spent a couple hours looking through the orientation, help wanted, and related pages. The next step appears to introduce myself. My name is Gregory Zobel, but I prefer to be called gz--nickname given by a former professor of mine. My background is in technical communication, usability, and rhetoric. Currently I am a teacher educator working in a College of Education at Western Oregon University. About 80% of my students are licensed teachers. Most of the courses I teach focus on using technology to support content delivery, pedagogy, productivity, etc. My interests in participating in the AOO project (increasing importance) are: - supporting and improving usability and accessibility of AOO documentation; - developing materials/marketing as well as templates for higher eduction faculty and administration; - developing materials, content, and tools for teacher educators--if we can convince K-12 teachers and faculty to use AOO, they will model the behavior for students; - conducting research and studies around use of AOO and other OS software in the classroom. From what I could tell, some of these activities rest in marketing while others are in documentation. Additionally, there appeared to be an Education-focused groups (based out of France, I think), but there does not seem to have been much activity. In the end, I want to proactively support the spread of AOO within Teacher Education to support greater adoption within K-12 and Higher Education. Any suggestions on where to go next would be welcome. I registered for one wiki but another failed multiple times ( I just sent an email in from my other email account.) Thank you for your hard work, time, attention, and consideration. As a side note, I could not find much or as detailed documentation on Base as for the other AOO products. Has there been less focus on Base? Just wondering a bit about the history. I'm thinking of using Base to develop a qualitative data analysis tool, but I'd like to know how much support there is for the product. Best, gz -- --- Gregory B. Zobel, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Educational Technology MSEd Program Coordinator Western Oregon University 345 N. Monmouth Ave Monmouth, OR 97361
Re: Proposed: Website Satisfaction Survey
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: Hi Rob, I like the idea of a satisfaction survey. I would suggest using an industry standard, the SUS. http://www.measuringusability.com/sus.php It's been around for 25 years or so, it has provided reliable metrics, and it could prove to be a rich data source. Thanks for passing that link along. The SUS approach might be even more interesting to apply to a satisfaction survey of the OpenOffice product itself. One thing to know: we do have access to a LimeSurvey instance (http://survey.openoffice.org). We used it most-recently to gather feedback for our AOO 4.0 logo contest. But it would be easy to use it for a SUS survey as well. The advantage with LimeSurvey is it makes it really easy to manage multiple translations of the survey, something nice with our international user based. If we did this survey, what other questions would we want to ask, to give data to correlate against? Maybe demographic factors like age, sex, country. Maybe operating system used (usability might vary by OS), certainly what version of OpenOffice is used, how long they have been using OpenOffice. Regards, -Rob Another alternative is to create the survey in Google Forms and then embed it on sub-page. I've used this approach in many classes taught online, and it goes pretty well. Plus you get more questions. Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: Google has a new service that makes it easy to add a website satisfaction survey to a website. The free version has 4 questions that are asked of 500 random website visitors each month. We would be given results on a monthly basis. (They also have a paid version of this service where you can customize the questions, but I think the free version is fine for our use). The questions are: I. Overall, how satisfied are you with this website? 1) Very satisfied 2) Somewhat satisfied 3) Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4) Somewhat dissatisfied 5) Very dissatisfied II. What, if anything, do you find frustrating or unappealing about this website? III. What is your main reason for visiting this website today? IV. Did you successfully complete your main reason for visiting this website today? 1) Yes, I was successful 2) I'm still completing my reason for visiting 3) No, I tried but wasn't successful You can see an example of what the survey looks like here: http://www.google.com/insights/consumersurveys/websat_example Adding it to the website is easy: a single line added to the header. Regards, -Rob - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org -- --- Gregory B. Zobel, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Educational Technology MSEd Program Coordinator Western Oregon University 345 N. Monmouth Ave Monmouth, OR 97361 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: soltools need(s) to be rebuilt
Many of those projects have RTTI or C++ exceptions disabled, so problems with typeinfo visibility may not show up there. I have figured out that I need to use GCC with the Solaris linker to avoid all these problems. BTW, the GCC people suggest people who use their compiler on Solaris to avoid using the GNU linker. So when I switched to the Solaris linker, all these problems disappeared. So the file solenv/gbuild/platform/solaris.mk need to modified in order to compile with GCC. As it stands, it assumes the compilation on Solaris is done using Solaris Studio! They certainly will be. I'm looking forward to have unxsogi as a platform with an out of the box build experience again. Me too :-) A.S. -- Apostols Syropoulos Xanthi, Greece
Re: Proposed: Website Satisfaction Survey
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: I'd be happy to help develop the survey questions. We could devise probably 4-7 more questions without users resisting too much--long surveys annoy users. Ending with a couple of open-ended questions: what is most frustrating to you about AOO? what do you like most about AOO? could also shed some light. From what I can tell, ASF has a policy of open content, open source, and it would follow that open data is a part of this. It might be possible to get engagement from parts of the academic usability community (i.e. analysis and discussion of what the different results mean, what to adjust, as well as promoting AOO in academia) by sharing the usability responses/results openly. Just an idea. I know when I was training, it was hard to find usability data because most entities protect it like IP--can't give results, shortcomings, or improvements. Having the data would also be nice. We take user privacy seriously as well. Even though we're a US-based non-profit we know that data protection laws vary and are stronger in Europe, where many of our users are. So if we anticipate that we'll want to make the raw survey results open (as opposite to just aggregate summarize) we'll need to think about what additional steps will be needed. For example, I usually track IP addresses in LimeSurvey to detect multiple submissions. We'd need to strip that out of any publicly released data. We'd also need a prominent disclaimer/notice to the user, stating how the data will be used. When we did the logo survey (results here [1]) we received over 5000 responses in one week. So there is an opportunity to get a substantial number of responses. If you want to start designing the survey questions a good place for this might be on the UX section of our wiki [2]. Maybe a new page linked to the UX Research Strategy page? Then send a link to that page to the dev mailing list and anyone interested can follow along and help. I'll volunteer to translate the survey design into LimeSurvey. If we keep it short it should be possible to then get it translated into a handful of languages. Regards, -Rob [1] http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/ [2] https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Apache_OpenOffice_User_Experience Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: Hi Rob, I like the idea of a satisfaction survey. I would suggest using an industry standard, the SUS. http://www.measuringusability.com/sus.php It's been around for 25 years or so, it has provided reliable metrics, and it could prove to be a rich data source. Thanks for passing that link along. The SUS approach might be even more interesting to apply to a satisfaction survey of the OpenOffice product itself. One thing to know: we do have access to a LimeSurvey instance (http://survey.openoffice.org). We used it most-recently to gather feedback for our AOO 4.0 logo contest. But it would be easy to use it for a SUS survey as well. The advantage with LimeSurvey is it makes it really easy to manage multiple translations of the survey, something nice with our international user based. If we did this survey, what other questions would we want to ask, to give data to correlate against? Maybe demographic factors like age, sex, country. Maybe operating system used (usability might vary by OS), certainly what version of OpenOffice is used, how long they have been using OpenOffice. Regards, -Rob Another alternative is to create the survey in Google Forms and then embed it on sub-page. I've used this approach in many classes taught online, and it goes pretty well. Plus you get more questions. Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: Google has a new service that makes it easy to add a website satisfaction survey to a website. The free version has 4 questions that are asked of 500 random website visitors each month. We would be given results on a monthly basis. (They also have a paid version of this service where you can customize the questions, but I think the free version is fine for our use). The questions are: I. Overall, how satisfied are you with this website? 1) Very satisfied 2) Somewhat satisfied 3) Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4) Somewhat dissatisfied 5) Very dissatisfied II. What, if anything, do you find frustrating or unappealing about this website? III. What is your main reason for visiting this website today? IV. Did you successfully complete your main reason for visiting this website today? 1) Yes, I was successful 2) I'm still completing my reason for visiting 3) No, I tried but wasn't successful You can see an example of what the survey looks like here:
Re: Proposed: Website Satisfaction Survey
On 11 December 2013 20:57, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: I'd be happy to help develop the survey questions. We could devise probably 4-7 more questions without users resisting too much--long surveys annoy users. Ending with a couple of open-ended questions: what is most frustrating to you about AOO? what do you like most about AOO? could also shed some light. From what I can tell, ASF has a policy of open content, open source, and it would follow that open data is a part of this. It might be possible to get engagement from parts of the academic usability community (i.e. analysis and discussion of what the different results mean, what to adjust, as well as promoting AOO in academia) by sharing the usability responses/results openly. Just an idea. I know when I was training, it was hard to find usability data because most entities protect it like IP--can't give results, shortcomings, or improvements. Having the data would also be nice. We take user privacy seriously as well. Even though we're a US-based non-profit we know that data protection laws vary and are stronger in Europe, where many of our users are. So if we anticipate that we'll want to make the raw survey results open (as opposite to just aggregate summarize) we'll need to think about what additional steps will be needed. For example, I usually track IP addresses in LimeSurvey to detect multiple submissions. We'd need to strip that out of any publicly released data. We'd also need a prominent disclaimer/notice to the user, stating how the data will be used. I am not sure how known it is, but just in case: the european laws on this subject got more strict about 1 year ago. Now a disclaimer is not enough, the user most positively accept it (checkbox is valid). It the cookie story all over. rgds jan I. When we did the logo survey (results here [1]) we received over 5000 responses in one week. So there is an opportunity to get a substantial number of responses. If you want to start designing the survey questions a good place for this might be on the UX section of our wiki [2]. Maybe a new page linked to the UX Research Strategy page? Then send a link to that page to the dev mailing list and anyone interested can follow along and help. I'll volunteer to translate the survey design into LimeSurvey. If we keep it short it should be possible to then get it translated into a handful of languages. Regards, -Rob [1] http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/ [2] https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Apache_OpenOffice_User_Experience Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: Hi Rob, I like the idea of a satisfaction survey. I would suggest using an industry standard, the SUS. http://www.measuringusability.com/sus.php It's been around for 25 years or so, it has provided reliable metrics, and it could prove to be a rich data source. Thanks for passing that link along. The SUS approach might be even more interesting to apply to a satisfaction survey of the OpenOffice product itself. One thing to know: we do have access to a LimeSurvey instance (http://survey.openoffice.org). We used it most-recently to gather feedback for our AOO 4.0 logo contest. But it would be easy to use it for a SUS survey as well. The advantage with LimeSurvey is it makes it really easy to manage multiple translations of the survey, something nice with our international user based. If we did this survey, what other questions would we want to ask, to give data to correlate against? Maybe demographic factors like age, sex, country. Maybe operating system used (usability might vary by OS), certainly what version of OpenOffice is used, how long they have been using OpenOffice. Regards, -Rob Another alternative is to create the survey in Google Forms and then embed it on sub-page. I've used this approach in many classes taught online, and it goes pretty well. Plus you get more questions. Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: Google has a new service that makes it easy to add a website satisfaction survey to a website. The free version has 4 questions that are asked of 500 random website visitors each month. We would be given results on a monthly basis. (They also have a paid version of this service where you can customize the questions, but I think the free version is fine for our use). The questions are: I. Overall, how satisfied are you with this website? 1) Very satisfied 2) Somewhat satisfied 3) Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4) Somewhat dissatisfied 5) Very dissatisfied II. What, if
Re: Proposed: Website Satisfaction Survey
Sounds good. I'll need to poke around a bit more. It looks like there are some already-existing and good resources in the UX section. I haven't worked in a wiki for a while either, so I need to review some of that. But I'll get to it. Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: I'd be happy to help develop the survey questions. We could devise probably 4-7 more questions without users resisting too much--long surveys annoy users. Ending with a couple of open-ended questions: what is most frustrating to you about AOO? what do you like most about AOO? could also shed some light. From what I can tell, ASF has a policy of open content, open source, and it would follow that open data is a part of this. It might be possible to get engagement from parts of the academic usability community (i.e. analysis and discussion of what the different results mean, what to adjust, as well as promoting AOO in academia) by sharing the usability responses/results openly. Just an idea. I know when I was training, it was hard to find usability data because most entities protect it like IP--can't give results, shortcomings, or improvements. Having the data would also be nice. We take user privacy seriously as well. Even though we're a US-based non-profit we know that data protection laws vary and are stronger in Europe, where many of our users are. So if we anticipate that we'll want to make the raw survey results open (as opposite to just aggregate summarize) we'll need to think about what additional steps will be needed. For example, I usually track IP addresses in LimeSurvey to detect multiple submissions. We'd need to strip that out of any publicly released data. We'd also need a prominent disclaimer/notice to the user, stating how the data will be used. When we did the logo survey (results here [1]) we received over 5000 responses in one week. So there is an opportunity to get a substantial number of responses. If you want to start designing the survey questions a good place for this might be on the UX section of our wiki [2]. Maybe a new page linked to the UX Research Strategy page? Then send a link to that page to the dev mailing list and anyone interested can follow along and help. I'll volunteer to translate the survey design into LimeSurvey. If we keep it short it should be possible to then get it translated into a handful of languages. Regards, -Rob [1] http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/ [2] https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Apache_OpenOffice_User_Experience Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: Hi Rob, I like the idea of a satisfaction survey. I would suggest using an industry standard, the SUS. http://www.measuringusability.com/sus.php It's been around for 25 years or so, it has provided reliable metrics, and it could prove to be a rich data source. Thanks for passing that link along. The SUS approach might be even more interesting to apply to a satisfaction survey of the OpenOffice product itself. One thing to know: we do have access to a LimeSurvey instance (http://survey.openoffice.org). We used it most-recently to gather feedback for our AOO 4.0 logo contest. But it would be easy to use it for a SUS survey as well. The advantage with LimeSurvey is it makes it really easy to manage multiple translations of the survey, something nice with our international user based. If we did this survey, what other questions would we want to ask, to give data to correlate against? Maybe demographic factors like age, sex, country. Maybe operating system used (usability might vary by OS), certainly what version of OpenOffice is used, how long they have been using OpenOffice. Regards, -Rob Another alternative is to create the survey in Google Forms and then embed it on sub-page. I've used this approach in many classes taught online, and it goes pretty well. Plus you get more questions. Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: Google has a new service that makes it easy to add a website satisfaction survey to a website. The free version has 4 questions that are asked of 500 random website visitors each month. We would be given results on a monthly basis. (They also have a paid version of this service where you can customize the questions, but I think the free version is fine for our use). The questions are: I. Overall, how satisfied are you with this website? 1) Very satisfied 2) Somewhat satisfied 3) Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 4) Somewhat dissatisfied 5) Very dissatisfied II. What, if
Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper
Steele, Raymond wrote: For select1st, we noticed that the functional header delivered with stdcxx4 did not define select1st, Select1st didn't make it into the C++ standard, so good standard compliant libraries don't include it anymore. but the aoo delivered functional located in systemstl/tr1 did. Our Makefile flags are set to include the stdcxx4 functional instead of the systemstl/tr1 functional. To get around this we modified namedvaluecollection.cxx: #if defined(__SUNPRO_CC) #include ../systemstl/tr1/functional #esle #include functional #endif Let us know if you think there is a better way to address this. The systemstl/tr1/functional header is a wrapper around good standard compliant functional headers. Many parts of the AOO codebase still expect the obsoleted stlport4 semantics and the wrapper provides them. The AOO codebase is being adjusted (e.g. [1],[2],[3]) to be more standard compliant, so obsolete parts will be replaced. When the emulation of an obsoleted construct is no longer needed by the codebase then that emulation can be removed from the wrappers. So the wrappers will become smaller and smaller until they can finally disappear. [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123755 [2] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123770 [3] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123754 So in short: please make sure that systemstl/tr1/functional wrapper around the good standard compliant functional header can work. Now we are on to figuring out why comphelper's having a linking error. It is trying to build libcomphelperC52.so, but it cannot find -lstlport_sunpro. lstlport_sunpro is no longer needed. If the header wrappers were used then the TR1 standard compliant C++ libraries cover everything that stlport was used for. Just find the Makefile that is responsible for the -lstlport_sunpro option and remove it. Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper
Okay, we will look some more. We were commenting out all instances before you wrote, but were still not having luck. Is it possible that we have to do a clean build? Raymond -Original Message- From: Herbert Duerr [mailto:h...@apache.org] Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 1:16 PM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Steele, Raymond; Meffe, David K Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper Steele, Raymond wrote: For select1st, we noticed that the functional header delivered with stdcxx4 did not define select1st, Select1st didn't make it into the C++ standard, so good standard compliant libraries don't include it anymore. but the aoo delivered functional located in systemstl/tr1 did. Our Makefile flags are set to include the stdcxx4 functional instead of the systemstl/tr1 functional. To get around this we modified namedvaluecollection.cxx: #if defined(__SUNPRO_CC) #include ../systemstl/tr1/functional #esle #include functional #endif Let us know if you think there is a better way to address this. The systemstl/tr1/functional header is a wrapper around good standard compliant functional headers. Many parts of the AOO codebase still expect the obsoleted stlport4 semantics and the wrapper provides them. The AOO codebase is being adjusted (e.g. [1],[2],[3]) to be more standard compliant, so obsolete parts will be replaced. When the emulation of an obsoleted construct is no longer needed by the codebase then that emulation can be removed from the wrappers. So the wrappers will become smaller and smaller until they can finally disappear. [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123755 [2] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123770 [3] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123754 So in short: please make sure that systemstl/tr1/functional wrapper around the good standard compliant functional header can work. Now we are on to figuring out why comphelper's having a linking error. It is trying to build libcomphelperC52.so, but it cannot find -lstlport_sunpro. lstlport_sunpro is no longer needed. If the header wrappers were used then the TR1 standard compliant C++ libraries cover everything that stlport was used for. Just find the Makefile that is responsible for the -lstlport_sunpro option and remove it. Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: aoo
Craig Rasch wrote: we need more exposure to let the android market know AOO exists! Are you referring to a port of Apache OpenOffice to Android, done under the auspices of _The Apache Software Foundation_ Or are you referring to the product in the Google Play Store that is based upon Apache Open Office, but is not distributed under an Apache License, nor is under the auspices of the Apache Software Foundation, despite containing Apache Open Office banners, logos, and the like, inside it? (I don't remember if I posted the URL of the relevant screenshots to this list, or not. My Google Experience Device does not have the ability to cut and paste URLs, otherwise I'd post the URLs here. They are on Flickr, with a caption of _This is not Apache Open Office_.. ) Or are you referring to something else? laptop will not supply a users needs when AOO and android will do anything a windows 8 laptop will do! Want to explain how to produce the Blue Screen of Death on an Android device? jonathon -- Sent from the eating establishment at the Far side of the Universe, at the begining of Time, and at the end of Space. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
RE: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper
Raymond and Herbet, I found out where the make file was including the stlport libraries. It was in solaris.mk in the gb_Library_FILENAMES and gb_Library_LAYER. I commented out the STLLIBS in both of these sections and it was able to build comphelper. While I'm not sure this is the best solution, it was where the LinkTarget.mk was getting the location for the libcomphelperC52.so. David Meffe -Original Message- From: Steele, Raymond Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 1:37 PM To: Herbert Duerr; dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Meffe, David K Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper Okay, we will look some more. We were commenting out all instances before you wrote, but were still not having luck. Is it possible that we have to do a clean build? Raymond -Original Message- From: Herbert Duerr [mailto:h...@apache.org] Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2013 1:16 PM To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Cc: Steele, Raymond; Meffe, David K Subject: Re: EXTERNAL: Re: Building comphelper Steele, Raymond wrote: For select1st, we noticed that the functional header delivered with stdcxx4 did not define select1st, Select1st didn't make it into the C++ standard, so good standard compliant libraries don't include it anymore. but the aoo delivered functional located in systemstl/tr1 did. Our Makefile flags are set to include the stdcxx4 functional instead of the systemstl/tr1 functional. To get around this we modified namedvaluecollection.cxx: #if defined(__SUNPRO_CC) #include ../systemstl/tr1/functional #esle #include functional #endif Let us know if you think there is a better way to address this. The systemstl/tr1/functional header is a wrapper around good standard compliant functional headers. Many parts of the AOO codebase still expect the obsoleted stlport4 semantics and the wrapper provides them. The AOO codebase is being adjusted (e.g. [1],[2],[3]) to be more standard compliant, so obsolete parts will be replaced. When the emulation of an obsoleted construct is no longer needed by the codebase then that emulation can be removed from the wrappers. So the wrappers will become smaller and smaller until they can finally disappear. [1] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123755 [2] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123770 [3] https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=123754 So in short: please make sure that systemstl/tr1/functional wrapper around the good standard compliant functional header can work. Now we are on to figuring out why comphelper's having a linking error. It is trying to build libcomphelperC52.so, but it cannot find -lstlport_sunpro. lstlport_sunpro is no longer needed. If the header wrappers were used then the TR1 standard compliant C++ libraries cover everything that stlport was used for. Just find the Makefile that is responsible for the -lstlport_sunpro option and remove it. Herbert - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
Re: Proposed: Website Satisfaction Survey
On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: Sounds good. I'll need to poke around a bit more. It looks like there are some already-existing and good resources in the UX section. I haven't worked in a wiki for a while either, so I need to review some of that. The wiki is there as a convenience. Use it only if it makes it easier for you. You could do it via the mailing list as well if you prefer. But I would recommend starting a new thread for that, on the marketing mailing list, since we've now drifted from discussion about website satisfaction. -Rob But I'll get to it. Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: I'd be happy to help develop the survey questions. We could devise probably 4-7 more questions without users resisting too much--long surveys annoy users. Ending with a couple of open-ended questions: what is most frustrating to you about AOO? what do you like most about AOO? could also shed some light. From what I can tell, ASF has a policy of open content, open source, and it would follow that open data is a part of this. It might be possible to get engagement from parts of the academic usability community (i.e. analysis and discussion of what the different results mean, what to adjust, as well as promoting AOO in academia) by sharing the usability responses/results openly. Just an idea. I know when I was training, it was hard to find usability data because most entities protect it like IP--can't give results, shortcomings, or improvements. Having the data would also be nice. We take user privacy seriously as well. Even though we're a US-based non-profit we know that data protection laws vary and are stronger in Europe, where many of our users are. So if we anticipate that we'll want to make the raw survey results open (as opposite to just aggregate summarize) we'll need to think about what additional steps will be needed. For example, I usually track IP addresses in LimeSurvey to detect multiple submissions. We'd need to strip that out of any publicly released data. We'd also need a prominent disclaimer/notice to the user, stating how the data will be used. When we did the logo survey (results here [1]) we received over 5000 responses in one week. So there is an opportunity to get a substantial number of responses. If you want to start designing the survey questions a good place for this might be on the UX section of our wiki [2]. Maybe a new page linked to the UX Research Strategy page? Then send a link to that page to the dev mailing list and anyone interested can follow along and help. I'll volunteer to translate the survey design into LimeSurvey. If we keep it short it should be possible to then get it translated into a handful of languages. Regards, -Rob [1] http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/ [2] https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Apache_OpenOffice_User_Experience Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: Hi Rob, I like the idea of a satisfaction survey. I would suggest using an industry standard, the SUS. http://www.measuringusability.com/sus.php It's been around for 25 years or so, it has provided reliable metrics, and it could prove to be a rich data source. Thanks for passing that link along. The SUS approach might be even more interesting to apply to a satisfaction survey of the OpenOffice product itself. One thing to know: we do have access to a LimeSurvey instance (http://survey.openoffice.org). We used it most-recently to gather feedback for our AOO 4.0 logo contest. But it would be easy to use it for a SUS survey as well. The advantage with LimeSurvey is it makes it really easy to manage multiple translations of the survey, something nice with our international user based. If we did this survey, what other questions would we want to ask, to give data to correlate against? Maybe demographic factors like age, sex, country. Maybe operating system used (usability might vary by OS), certainly what version of OpenOffice is used, how long they have been using OpenOffice. Regards, -Rob Another alternative is to create the survey in Google Forms and then embed it on sub-page. I've used this approach in many classes taught online, and it goes pretty well. Plus you get more questions. Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: Google has a new service that makes it easy to add a website satisfaction survey to a website. The free version has 4 questions that are asked of 500 random website visitors each month. We would be given results on a monthly basis. (They
Reporting a problem with the OpenOffice website
No Problem.just thinking (although I am sure there is a possibility this has been requested before) that it sure would be nice to see screen shots of the latest version of the software as a readily available link as part of the page design. Just feel that there might be allot of people who'd like to see a decent shot of how the individual applications look on both MAC and PC. If there actually are screen shots somewhere they weren't were I would of expected them to immediately and readily be when I went to the Link to learn more about Open Office. Just an idea and keep up the absolutely excellent work!! Gene A. Hoch Director of Product Development Ph: 330.225.5949 x254 Cell: 330.805.1055 Web: http://www.medicuscorporate.com/ www.medicuscorporate.com logo_b Click to Get 10% off your entire order at http://golfshopcentral.com/?B=1A=99Task=Redirect GolfShopCentral.com Become an Affiliate and http://www.golfshopteam.com/aw.aspx?B=9A=99Task=Click Start Earning Money now!
Re: Proposed: Website Satisfaction Survey
On Dec 11, 2013, at 12:09 PM, Rob Weir wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 3:04 PM, jan i j...@apache.org wrote: On 11 December 2013 20:57, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: I'd be happy to help develop the survey questions. We could devise probably 4-7 more questions without users resisting too much--long surveys annoy users. Ending with a couple of open-ended questions: what is most frustrating to you about AOO? what do you like most about AOO? could also shed some light. From what I can tell, ASF has a policy of open content, open source, and it would follow that open data is a part of this. It might be possible to get engagement from parts of the academic usability community (i.e. analysis and discussion of what the different results mean, what to adjust, as well as promoting AOO in academia) by sharing the usability responses/results openly. Just an idea. I know when I was training, it was hard to find usability data because most entities protect it like IP--can't give results, shortcomings, or improvements. Having the data would also be nice. We take user privacy seriously as well. Even though we're a US-based non-profit we know that data protection laws vary and are stronger in Europe, where many of our users are. So if we anticipate that we'll want to make the raw survey results open (as opposite to just aggregate summarize) we'll need to think about what additional steps will be needed. For example, I usually track IP addresses in LimeSurvey to detect multiple submissions. You can't depend on IP Filtering if you are going through a NAT. We'd need to strip that out of any publicly released data. We'd also need a prominent disclaimer/notice to the user, stating how the data will be used. I am not sure how known it is, but just in case: the european laws on this subject got more strict about 1 year ago. Now a disclaimer is not enough, the user most positively accept it (checkbox is valid). It the cookie story all over. That could be implemented as a question in the survey, say the last question. As long as it happens before any data is collected and the user explicitly opts-in. Good ideas and I love the open data concept! Regards, Dave -Rob rgds jan I. When we did the logo survey (results here [1]) we received over 5000 responses in one week. So there is an opportunity to get a substantial number of responses. If you want to start designing the survey questions a good place for this might be on the UX section of our wiki [2]. Maybe a new page linked to the UX Research Strategy page? Then send a link to that page to the dev mailing list and anyone interested can follow along and help. I'll volunteer to translate the survey design into LimeSurvey. If we keep it short it should be possible to then get it translated into a handful of languages. Regards, -Rob [1] http://survey.openoffice.org/reports/aoo40-logo-poll/ [2] https://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Apache_OpenOffice_User_Experience Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Gregory Zobel zob...@wou.edu wrote: Hi Rob, I like the idea of a satisfaction survey. I would suggest using an industry standard, the SUS. http://www.measuringusability.com/sus.php It's been around for 25 years or so, it has provided reliable metrics, and it could prove to be a rich data source. Thanks for passing that link along. The SUS approach might be even more interesting to apply to a satisfaction survey of the OpenOffice product itself. One thing to know: we do have access to a LimeSurvey instance (http://survey.openoffice.org). We used it most-recently to gather feedback for our AOO 4.0 logo contest. But it would be easy to use it for a SUS survey as well. The advantage with LimeSurvey is it makes it really easy to manage multiple translations of the survey, something nice with our international user based. If we did this survey, what other questions would we want to ask, to give data to correlate against? Maybe demographic factors like age, sex, country. Maybe operating system used (usability might vary by OS), certainly what version of OpenOffice is used, how long they have been using OpenOffice. Regards, -Rob Another alternative is to create the survey in Google Forms and then embed it on sub-page. I've used this approach in many classes taught online, and it goes pretty well. Plus you get more questions. Best, gz On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Rob Weir robw...@apache.org wrote: Google has a new service that makes it easy to add a website satisfaction survey to a website. The free version has 4 questions that are asked of 500 random website visitors each month. We would be given results on a monthly basis. (They also have a paid
